TF6 Bumblebee stand-alone film (2018) production news

[G1Optimal]

Isn't bay still exective producer?

[GoktimusPrime]

Isn't bay still exective producer?

Yes, but it's the director who calls the shots. The executive producer overseas finances (e.g. funding, accounts management, copyrights, royalties, budget etc.). It is the director who directs the making of a film. The director is also legally recognised as the author of a film.
e.g.
Stanley Kubrick's Clockwork Orange
Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill
Kurosawa Akira's Seven Samurai
Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings
George Lucas' Star Wars A New Hope, The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, & Revenge of the Sith
Irvin Kershner's Star Wars The Empire Strikes Back
Richard Marquand's Star Wars Return of the Jedi
JJ Abrams' Star Wars The Force Awakens
Gareth Edwards' Star Wars Rogue One

I've worked on a few student films and a short film before, and it is absolutely the director who calls all the shots.

[djanscak]

it is absolutely the director who calls all the shots.

Except when it isn't: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Smithee

:-)

[G1Optimal]

I see

[philby]

ok but what if you like the director but he still gets given a crap script? or instructions from higher up? does michael bay choose how much product placement goes into each movie and how intrusive it is? or how many scenes/shots that linger onto an attractive young female? etc?

[GoktimusPrime]

ok but what if you like the director but he still gets given a crap script?

Firstly, let me just say that my opinions on Michael Bay's work as a film director are not the same as my opinions on him as a person. Having briefly met Bay IRL I found him to be a reasonably friendly and approachable person. So when you say, "like the director," yeah, I like Michael Bay enough as a person. This has no bearing on my feelings about his work though.

When a director is given a script it is up to him/her to decide how closely they want to stick to the script or whether they should deviate from it. A movie is essentially a film adaptation of the script. One example of just how different a movie can be under two directors is Superman II, when you compare Richard Lester's vs Richard Donner's cut.

or instructions from higher up?

The director is the lead authority in the making of the film. If the producer doesn't like it, then s/he can replace the director (as happened with Richard Donner on Superman II), but ultimately the director is still in charge.

does michael bay choose how much product placement goes into each movie and how intrusive it is? or how many scenes/shots that linger onto an attractive young female? etc?

Pretty much as directed by the director. Sponsors may stipulate conditions as to how their product may be portrayed on screen.
e.g. In Slumdog Millionaire Mercedes Benz refused to allow their brand to be seen in a slum. As a result, the Mercedes that were shot in the slum sets had their logos digitally removed in post production. I'm assuming that this was likely because they only found out about this after the principal photography had been done, because doing it digitally is much, much more expensive than simply removing or covering up logos (known as "greeking"). And Michael Bay has admitted that he shoots the gratuitous shots of girls to appeal to chest-thumping teenage jocks.

I personally don't mind the product placement TBH. It helps to ground the films in reality when you see recognisable brands and products. Cos in the TV series where brands and products are fictitious, it just doesn't feel as 'real.' e.g. G1 felt more real because they had vehicles like VW Beetle, F15 Eagles, Datsun Fairladies etc. When I see these things IRL it makes me think of Transformers. When I watch shows like TF Prime and the current RiD series with their made-up vehicle models and other products, it just doesn't make the same real-world connection. And we know that G1 started losing steam when alt modes shifted more heavily towards made-up fantasy modes instead of real world ones. The golden "Gee Wun" period is the one that has more real-world based alt modes. Heck, just look at Masterpiece. With the sole exceptions of Grimlock and Star Sabre, every MP figure is based on a real world thing. Same with Binaltech/Alternators/Alternity. These lines just wouldn't be the same if they just used generic or approximated vehicle makes.

[philby]

Firstly, let me just say that my opinions on Michael Bay's work as a film director are not the same as my opinions on him as a person. Having briefly met Bay IRL I found him to be a reasonably friendly and approachable person. So when you say, "like the director," yeah, I like Michael Bay enough as a person. This has no bearing on my feelings about his work though.

When a director is given a script it is up to him/her to decide how closely they want to stick to the script or whether they should deviate from it. A movie is essentially a film adaptation of the script. One example of just how different a movie can be under two directors is Superman II, when you compare Richard Lester's vs Richard Donner's cut.


The director is the lead authority in the making of the film. If the producer doesn't like it, then s/he can replace the director (as happened with Richard Donner on Superman II), but ultimately the director is still in charge.


Pretty much as directed by the director. Sponsors may stipulate conditions as to how their product may be portrayed on screen.
e.g. In Slumdog Millionaire Mercedes Benz refused to allow their brand to be seen in a slum. As a result, the Mercedes that were shot in the slum sets had their logos digitally removed in post production. I'm assuming that this was likely because they only found out about this after the principal photography had been done, because doing it digitally is much, much more expensive than simply removing or covering up logos (known as "greeking"). And Michael Bay has admitted that he shoots the gratuitous shots of girls to appeal to chest-thumping teenage jocks.

I personally don't mind the product placement TBH. It helps to ground the films in reality when you see recognisable brands and products. Cos in the TV series where brands and products are fictitious, it just doesn't feel as 'real.' e.g. G1 felt more real because they had vehicles like VW Beetle, F15 Eagles, Datsun Fairladies etc. When I see these things IRL it makes me think of Transformers. When I watch shows like TF Prime and the current RiD series with their made-up vehicle models and other products, it just doesn't make the same real-world connection. And we know that G1 started losing steam when alt modes shifted more heavily towards made-up fantasy modes instead of real world ones. The golden "Gee Wun" period is the one that has more real-world based alt modes. Heck, just look at Masterpiece. With the sole exceptions of Grimlock and Star Sabre, every MP figure is based on a real world thing. Same with Binaltech/Alternators/Alternity. These lines just wouldn't be the same if they just used generic or approximated vehicle makes.

i'm not talking about product placement as in cars, i'm talking about a robot being thrown into a gigantic in your face ad for victorias secret

[Smint]

I think he'd get credit for executive producer credit so the studios can use his name...his movies have been financially successful after all.

But good choice anyway. Maybe we'll finally get a watchable Transformers movie.

[griffin]

The logo for the sixth movie, currently referred to as the Bumblebee Movie, is said to now be trademarked in America.
It looks a bit like the angry bee image that featured on the "Bee-otch" air freshener inside the Bumblebee car in the 2007 Movie (which was very similar to an existing air freshener).